Originally Posted by
petit plateau
Yes that is a daft example. The US has no operational control over the UK nuclear deterrent. It might have considerable industrial leverage but that is a very different thing indeed. And the relevant calculation - which is a very real consideration - becomes "how long to regenerate that industrial capability" in the event of a breakdown in relationships. Whether the UK (or indeed any other nation) gets those calculations right is debatable, especially as the minimum economic scale required to deliver the full range of security/defence solutions is nigh-on global in scale. It is certainly at least one continent's worth of economy, hence any nonsense about strategic autonomy has to be heavily qualified. I suspect that after the dust has settled re Russia's invasion of Ukraine, that a lot of countries will be revisiting those calculations.
In respect of the Challenger 3 upgrade what none of us know - or at least none of us who do know can disclose - is what confidential arrangements are in place to ensure that the necessary minimum design team, industrial capability, through life support, and contractual autonomy are in place. It might be that none of that is in place, in which case potentially the German government might have an arms control 'lock' on the Ch3 turret. However it might be that all those are in place - including confidential government-to-government arrangements - in which case there can never be a question of a German 'lock'. We simply don't know, but what we do know is that it is not as simplistic as some assume.
This river flows in many directions. As an example the Argentine efforts to re-equip their air force have frequently foundered because the relevant aircraft that they coveted included UK owned IP, most often the ejector seats.
================
The data that became available a few months ago revealed that the KIA ratio for personnel was 6:1 in Ukraine's favour. Given that pre-war population sizes were 3:1 in Russia's favor, but that a lot of the better educated Russian males in-zone for conscription promptly fled the country, these staggering ongoing loss-rates appear simply unsustainable for Russia. By late 2022 it seems about 900,000 Russians had fled Russia (see link below, it is likely over 1m now) and the vast majority of those appear to be male. In contrast Ukraine appears to have very little equivalent thinning out of its corresponding pool. Personally I hope that we in the broader Western alliance give Ukraine all that is necessary for them to promptly clear the Russian invasion out of their territory at minimum further loss of Ukrainian life; and that the West retains its strategic patience through this effort and beyond.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia...ion_of_Ukraine
"Following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, more than 300,000 Russian citizens and residents are estimated to have left Russia by mid-March 2022, at least 500,000 by the end of August 2022, and an additional 400,000[1] by early October, for a total of approximately 900,000. This number includes economic migrants, conscientious objectors, and some political refugees"
Surly, someone soon, must tap Putin on the shoulder and say…. This is not going very well??
Or am I being foolish in thinking that.??